Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64912 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3884 of 2024 Revisionist :- Anand Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 21.05.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Mirzapur, in Case No. 592 of 2022 (Sunita Srivastava Vs. Anand Kumar Srivastava) under Section 125(3) of Criminal Procedure Code and execution of Recovery warrant dated 26.06.2024 arising out of Criminal Misc. Case No. 301 of 2013, Police Station Kotwali Sahar, District Mirzapur and also prays to stay the further proceeding as well as execution of recovery warrant of the aforesaid orders during the pendency of the revision. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the amount of maintenance is in arrears regarding which the learned trial court passed the order dated 21.05.2024 directing the C.T.O. Varanasi to deduct the amount of Rs. 18,000/- per month from the amount of pension of revisionist and to credit in the account of opposite party no. 2, the wife. He further submits that total amount of pension is about Rs. 35,000/- out of which Rs. 18,000/- per month has been directed to be deducted that is in excess. He also submits that the amount of G.P.F. was attached by the learned trial court in this regard against which the revision was filed before this Court and was allowed and the G.P.F. account was released but even today the amount of G.P.F. has not been paid to him that is the reason he is not in a position to maintain his family after deduction of Rs. 18,000/- from his pension account, therefore, request to reduce the amount for deduction. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the orders passed by the learned trial court dated 21.05.2024 and 26.06.2024, it appears that the amount of maintenance is not being paid by the revisionist regarding which recovery proceedings are pending in which Rs. 18,000/- per month has been directed to be deducted from the pension account of the revisionist for payment to the opposite party no. 2. It also appears that the learned trial court made direction for deduction of amount from the account of G.P.F. which was challenged before this Court in Criminal Revision No. 6698 of 2023 and was allowed by this Court by order dated 14.03.2024. Prior to this, Criminal Revision No. 4821 of 2022 was also filed before this Court against the order passed by the learned trial court dated 08.02.2024 for recovery of arrears of maintenance. This Court by order dated 07.02.2023 in Criminal Revision No. 4821 of 2022 stayed the amount of arrears to the extent of 50% and directed the revisionist to make payment of 50% amount of arrears from the date of application to the passing of order dated 08.09.2022 in eight equal installments within six months and he was to continue to pay maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 9,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 from the date of impugned order but the revisionist did not comply with the directions issued by this Court by order dated 07.02.2023 and the amount remained as arrears regarding which the learned trial court has directed the C.T.O. to deduct the amount. In this way, the revisionist appears to have failed to comply with the directions passed by this Court for recovery of arrears by order dated 07.02.2023 and even today he is seeking relaxation by this Court which cannot be said to be proper and just. It appears that the revisionist is trying to avoid to comply the order passed by this Court, therefore, he is not entitled for any concession and the order passed by the learned trial court dated 21.05.2024 and 26.06.2024 cannot be said to be illegal and inappropriate, therefore, it does not require any interference by this Court. However, it is open to the revisionist to go before the learned trial court for reducing the amount, in view of his circumstances, if any and the learned trial court will pass appropriate order. Accordingly, this revision is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad